Ecclesiastes 3:16

IS MAN ANY MORE THAN A BEAST?

"And moreover I saw under the sun, in the place of justice, that wickedness was there; and in the place of righteousness, that wickedness was there. I said in my heart, God will judge the righteous and the wicked; for there is a time there for every purpose and for every work. I said in my heart, It is because of the sons of men, that God may prove them, and that they may see that they are but as beasts. For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they all have one breath; and man hath no preeminence above the beasts; for all is vanity. All go unto one place; all are of the dust, and all turn to dust again. Who knoweth the spirit of man, whether it goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast, whether it goeth downward to the earth? Wherefore I saw that there is nothing better, than that a man should rejoice in his works; for that is his portion: for who shall bring him back to see what shall be after him."

This terrible paragraph is a favorite of atheists and skeptics and all materialists who hold the view that man is nothing but an animal. Volney, Frederick the Great and Voltaire loved this paragraph.[11] Also the Jehovah's Witnesses base their rejection of the immortality of the soul on this passage. We shall present two opposite views of this paragraph, finding in our own heart a great perplexity as to which is correct.

(1) This understands Solomon here as saying that a man is no better in any way than an animal, that no one knows whether the soul of man goes up to God when he dies, or if the soul of the beast goes downward. "This is a favorite proof-text for those who deny that man has an immortal spirit that survives physical death."[12] This writer is no apologist for Solomon. Throughout the historical books, we stressed the consummate wickedness of this evil man; but there are some things about the general interpretation of this paragraph that do not fit. Solomon believed in God; he had just stated that God would judge wicked men (Ecclesiastes 3:17); and he could not possibly have meant that God would judge them in this present life. Furthermore, as Grieve noted, "He here combats the idea that man's breath goes back to God who gave it, although he allows that as a fact in 12:7."[13] It raises a question if Solomon actually did, in this passage, contradict what he later said. We seriously doubt it.

(2) Who are these men whom Solomon said were "but as beasts"? Did he say this of all mankind, or merely of those wicked men who were perverting justice in the courts (Ecclesiastes 3:16). We think the words here should be restricted in their application to wicked men, which would be fully in harmony with what the rest of the Bible flatly declares, namely, that an evil man, "Is like the beasts that perish" (Psalms 49:20). The words `sons of men' are not the same as `all mankind.' And the Biblical usage justifies the conclusion that the words here may be used to distinguish them from `sons of God.' Favoring this viewpoint is what F. C. Cook declared to be the proper translation of Ecclesiastes 3:21. The words translated `whether' are not in the Hebrew text.[14] That means that our version, ASV, the RSV, the Septuagint (LXX) and nearly all current translations have `emended the text.' That means that what they have given us is the word of the translators, not the Word of God, which we hold is found only in the Hebrew text. Let us read it correctly:

"Who knoweth the spirit of man that goeth upward, and the spirit of the beast that goeth downward to the earth" (KJV).

"The words `who knoweth' are used here and elsewhere in Scripture as a reference to that which is not fully understood."[15] They do not denote complete ignorance. Speaking of translators and their free-wheeling habit of `emending' God's Word, we should bear continually in mind the fact that the translators of the KING JAMES BIBLE believed that they were translating the Word of God, whereas many current `translators' consider themselves competent to tell us what the Holy Spirit `was trying to say'! This is an important reason why we prefer the alternative understanding of this difficult paragraph.

We should remember, however, that even if the first view of this passage is correct, the message in it would then be most certainly false. It was identified in the text as what Solomon thought in his heart; and like many another thing that Solomon thought in his heart, it was not the teaching of the Holy Spirit; because even the Old Testament reveals that there was a firm conviction among God's people of the resurrection and of life after death. Man is not merely a beast, but he must give an account to God for his behavior as stated in Ecclesiastes 3:17; and that verse is also additional proof of the accuracy of the second view of this paragraph.

IS MAN ONLY AN ANIMAL?

Our wicked society today must face up to this question. Powerful and evil voices are shouting an affirmative answer. When our Supreme Court outlawed prayer in the public schools, while retaining it both in their court, and in the Congress, they yielded to those irresponsible and godless voices.

Every day in 10,000 classrooms, atheistic teachers are telling their gullible students that man is merely an animal, `highly evolved,' of course, but still an animal with no immortal spirit. "The vast majority of these evolutionists have long ago denied the existence of the God of the Bible."[16] Their theory of evolution is itself a blatant and unprovable lie; and the ultimate consequences of any society's accepting it are certain to terminate in the absolute destruction of that society.

If man is only an animal, it is not a sin to commit murder, robbery, mayhem, adultery, or anything else that the unregenerated mind may choose to do. Let the gullible fools who are teaching the theory try to explain the necessary implications of it in any other way. It is not wrong for fishes to eat one another, nor for animals to kill each other. It is not wrong for dogs to kill either cats, other dogs, or any other animal.

If man is but an animal, he is not responsible or in any other manner guilty if he commits murder. Clarence Darrow, one of the most famous criminal lawyers of this century, defended the brutal, senseless sex-murder of a young boy, pleading that, "The conduct of man or the other animals is no more subject to whim or choice than the action of the planets."[17] Is it true? Certainly, if man is merely an animal.

If our stupid and grossly wicked society really wants the explanation of the irresistible tidal wave of violent crimes which are destroying our cities and threatening the collapse of civilization itself, they must find it in this very conception, that there is no God and that man is merely an animal.

There is only one reason why it's wrong for one man to kill another; and that reason is that every man is created in the image of God; and his destruction is against God Himself. A godless society has no more rights than a society of brown rats. God help our deluded generation to find the way back to sanity before it is too late! Many in our current culture have not yet caught on to the truth which was so bluntly stated by Clarence Darrow; but a whole generation of young criminals have already adopted it.

Oh, but it is against the law to commit murder! How is this so? It is true because the Ten Commandments, given by God Himself, are recognized in 47 of the 48 contiguous states of our beloved nation as the basic law of the land. Let the atheists have their way long enough and they'll remove that, just like they did prayer in the public schools. In fact, by the removal of the death penalty for murder, they have already contradicted the God-commanded execution of capital punishment upon every human being guilty of murder. Yes, God commanded that every murderer should be put to death (Genesis 9:6); and that is not an option, it is a Divine order. God help America to wake up!